April 10, 2007

A rare show of bipartisanship--or flagrant pandering from a party that in the last two weeks has passed resolutions in both houses of the Colorado legislature condemning the Iraq war along party line votes?

Republicans opposed both Democrat-sponsored anti-war resolutions, and at least can be seen as being logically consistent.

"They do it for one reason. They do it because their country asks them to," said Senate Minority Leader Andy McElhany. "I think it's important we take our time to honor those for whom time is standing still."

"With this resolution, we pay tribute to the brave men and women of Colorado who have served, and who are now serving our country in Iraq and Afghanistan," said House sponsor Rep. Stella Garza Hicks, R-Colorado Springs. "They have fought bravely and have served us all with tremendous dignity and honor. We owe them all a great debt for their service, and we will always hold a special place of honor for the soldiers and families who have made the ultimate sacrifice serving our country."

As taps rang out in both chambers, family members who've lost loved ones in the war wiped away tears.

Senate Joint Resolution 32, sponsored by Senate President Joan Fitz-Gerald, D-Coal Creek Canyon, and Garza Hicks, named the 48 Colorado soldiers who made "the ultimate sacrifice" while serving their country in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan. It also honors Colorado military personnel who have served or are currently serving in the two countries.

Colorado Democrats, who hold a majority in both houses of the legislature, passed two resolutions condemning the Iraq war while also honoring the service of those who have or who are serving. The Senate version was more harsh than the House's rendition, but the effect was the same:

Littleton Republican Sen. Mike Kopp, an Army veteran who served in the first Gulf War, said he has received letters from soldiers in Iraq who complain that the resolution diminishes their sacrifices.

"We can chose the politics of abandonment or loyalty to our troops," he said.

The incongruity of such a display of political grandstanding--undercutting the troops by passing resolutions opposing the war they are fighting, and then subsequently praising their sacrifice. Liberal logic boggles the mind.

To demonstrate that this is just a political front, and reflects little in the way of true feeling on the Democratic side (other than taking advantage of a growing anti-war feeling), take note of one senator's threat:

Sen. Ron Tupa, D-Boulder, chastised House Democrats for gutting the tougher language of his Senate version. He said Senate Democrats have the votes to stick by their resolution, forcing the House to either back down or kill the measure.

Pandering. Plain. And. Simple. Taking a page right out of the John Kerry flip-flop guide to political action.

The Democrats have gone on record as being for the troops while being against the war. They have merely adopted the bumper sticker slogans so popular with the Left.

Colorado Republicans rightly rejected the Dems' resolutions. Their support for this resolution is clearly not in doubt.

SP Approved:

Contributors

Want to contribute? Visit our store for conservative gear for 2008!"A lot of guys yearning for adventure and romance would give their left one to be referred to in print as a man "who identified himself only as 'El Presidente.'" Nobody, for example, is ever going to refer to me as a man who "identified himself only as El Presidente." You bastard."--Drunkablog